Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 04:49:46 PM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on Today at 08:55:23 AM
Nellie puts the shot at z229.
Explain.
Her estimate was based on a review of still frames after watching the film.  Her view is inconsistent with her testimony.  We can see her looking back at JFK as he is grasping for his upper chest/throat well after z250.  She was adamant that she did not look back after the second shot. She was never asked when she thought JBC turned right after the first shot or when she thought JBC uttered “no, no , no” which she said was before the second shot. We can see JBC saying this in the z240s.

Quote
How is Altgens 6 an argument against Connally choosing z234 as the frame he felt he was shot?
According to Altgens his no. 6 photo at z255 was taken after the first and before any other shots. So with JBC estimating that he was hit on the second shot at z234, there is a conflict with Altgens (as well as several dozen others as to the 1…...2...3 shot pattern).

Quote
You were the one implying Connally felt the bullet first and then heard the shot.
I was asking you to provide a quote for such a nonsensical idea!
No. You were arguing that he was hit in the back on the first shot. If that was the case and if his recollection of hearing the shot and feeling the bullet impact was not made up, you are really saying he got the order reversed as he must have heard the shot after the impact.
2
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Jerry Organ on Today at 03:50:54 PM »
 

Agent Ready, the man standing on the front of the running board near the motorcycle camera-left, turns his head sharply rightward during the same half-second as the Connallys (Z162ff).

 

Ready continues to turn his head rightward even more.

The HSCA Z200s left-ward head turn by JFK was one of their major mistakes. Dale Myers, for example, debunked it years ago.
3
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Charles Collins on Today at 01:03:24 PM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 06:51:08 PM
As excellent a researcher as Roberdeaux is, and there can be little doubt of that, I've always found it of paramount importance to do my own research rather than rely on the work of others, regardless of how illustrious they are. Below is a close-up video of JFK in the Z-film. We see his head turn to the right as he waves and smiles to the crowds lined on Elm Street. I, personally, do not detect any great urgency in this head turn and the fact that he begins to smile and wave makes a mockery of any notion that he is responding to the sound of a shot.
Is he smiling and waving at the bullet as it passes by?
This is the very well documented moment when Mary Woodward and her colleagues call out to the President and the First Lady to look their way. This would explain why JFK begins to smile and wave. This is why Jackie turns her head from left to right. I too must respectfully disagree with any notion that JFK's head has snapped to the right as a result of hearing a shot. In fact, I find the idea ludicrous.



Calling an idea ludicrous isn’t being respectful of it Dan. But thanks for the video link. At least on my iPad and Chrome browser, if I go full-screen with the video, it is possible to pause it and then “grab” the control time bar at the bottom and make the video stop, or go forward or backward at any speed that you want to drag the control at. The first part, which shows the segment in which the limo occupants appear to be reacting to a missed first shot is clear enough to see all four of the VIP passengers. It appears to me that the first part of JBC’s reactions are similar to JFK’s reactions (until the wave by JFK) but lag behind JFK’s reactions by a little bit. They both initially appear to instinctively glance toward their spouses (a normal and instinctive male protective reaction) and one that JBC apparently didn’t remember accurately. Then both of them snap their heads to the right very quickly. JFK appears to have heard the loud shot but didn’t immediately recognize it as a shot, saw nothing that presented itself as a threat, and recovered his composure very quickly and began to wave back at the crowd. On the other hand, JBC appears to be continuing to try to turn as far to his right as he can in that seat. This would be in accordance with his testimony. Both Nellie Connally and Jackie turn to their right also. I really don’t believe that those reactions, from all four of them at roughly the same time, would be warranted by someone in the crowd calling out. After all, they were just leaving a huge crowd where a lot of people were doing just that.
There is a lot of other physical evidence that suggests an early missed shot. Off the top of my head I can name a few:
1.  Rosemary Willis snaps her head back towards the TSBD and begins slowing down in order to stop. The spacing of the dots showing her path on the Roberdeaux map graphically illustrates the slow down. It can also be seen in the Z-film.
2.  The Hughes film has a skip of a few frames at approximately this same time. It is believed it could only be due to Hughes’ reaction to the sound of the shot by lifting his finger pressure on the camera button for an instant.
3.  The Dorman film has a huge jiggle upwards before being abruptly stopped at approximately this same time.
4.  The Tina Towner film stops just before this same time, this agrees with her statement that the first shot sounded about the same time, or slightly after, she stopped filming.
5. It appears to me that the Zapruder film has a jiggle about the same time that JFK snaps his head to the right.

I have been trying to explore different possibilities with an open mind. But again, I cannot simply dismiss all the above physical evidence that suggests an early missed shot. There are also plenty of witness accounts that also suggest this that I haven’t listed.
4
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Today at 08:55:23 AM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on Today at 07:11:20 AM
I don’t ignore it at all. It is just that a second shot at that point is completely inconsistent with:

1. Nellie’s statement to Dr. Shires that he was turned to the right when hit.
2. Nellie’s evidence that after the first shot and before the second she heard JBC yell “no, no, no” before the second shot. JBC appears to utter the words “no, no, no” in the mid 240s.
3. Nellie said she looked back at JFK after the first and before the second shots and saw him with no expression and his hands near his neck. She said after the second shot occurred she never looked back. She does not look back at JFK until after z250 and turns to look at JBC at z269-270. So z250-269 is before the second shot, according to that.

Nellie puts the shot at z229.
Explain.

Quote
4. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was after the first and before any other shots.

Both men are shot at this point. How is Altgens 6 an argument against Connally choosing z234 as the frame he felt he was shot?
Quote
5. Hickey said he was turned facing forward before the second shot and remained facing forward to see the third shot. He is still facing rearward in Altgens 6.
Like point 4., this is not evidence against Connally's choice of z234
Quote
6. JBC insisted that he turned to his right trying to see JFK before the second shot. There is nowhere prior to z240 that he makes any attempt to see JFK.
He is also adamant he was facing a little left of centre when he was shot. More evidence you ignore.
Quote
7.  The first shot was after z186. We both agree on that. But there are over 40 witnesses who recalled the shot pattern as 1……2…3. That pattern cannot possibly fit a second shot before the midpoint between 1 and 3 with the headshot being  the third shot. Z234 is far too early.
This can be interpreted as evidence for a shot after the head shot
Quote
8… I could go on, but you get the idea.
No you can't.
That's everything you've got and it's already looking pretty shaky.
There is not a single valid argument against Connally's choice of z234 as the moment he felt he was shot.
Quote
So can you tell us why JBC saying he heard the first shot and then felt the bullet impact in his back was actually saying the opposite?  No interpretation. Just read what he said.
I literally don't understand this question.
You were the one implying Connally felt the bullet first and then heard the shot.
I was asking you to provide a quote for such a nonsensical idea!
5
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 07:11:20 AM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 11:32:16 PM
As I said, I don't ignore anything.

Mason Untruth #5
Do you ignore that on two separate occasions Connally examined the Z-frames and chose z234 as the frame he was hit?
If you don't just ignore it, what is your explanation for this.

I don’t ignore it at all. It is just that a second shot at that point is completely inconsistent with:

1. Nellie’s statement to Dr. Shires that he was turned to the right when hit.
2. Nellie’s evidence that after the first shot and before the second she heard JBC yell “no, no, no” before the second shot. JBC appears to utter the words “no, no, no” in the mid 240s.
3. Nellie said she looked back at JFK after the first and before the second shots and saw him with no expression and his hands near his neck. She said after the second shot occurred she never looked back. She does not look back at JFK until after z250 and turns to look at JBC at z269-270. So z250-269 is before the second shot, according to that.
4. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was after the first and before any other shots.
5. Hickey said he was turned facing forward before the second shot and remained facing forward to see the third shot. He is still facing rearward in Altgens 6.
6. JBC insisted that he turned to his right trying to see JFK before the second shot. There is nowhere prior to z240 that he makes any attempt to see JFK.
7.  The first shot was after z186. We both agree on that. But there are over 40 witnesses who recalled the shot pattern as 1……2…3. That pattern cannot possibly fit a second shot before the midpoint between 1 and 3 with the headshot being  the third shot. Z234 is far too early.
8… I could go on, but you get the idea.

Quote
What universe are you in Dan?

The universe that understands how the English language works.
So can you tell us why JBC saying he heard the first shot and then felt the bullet impact in his back was actually saying the opposite?  No interpretation. Just read what he said.
6
Conspiracy Theories / Re: RFK Jr Believes Second Gunman Involved In Father's Assassination
« Last post by Richard Smith on Today at 01:14:50 AM »
Quote from: Joe Elliott on May 23, 2024, 08:08:50 PM
Yes. Just as the Trump supporters say the evidence for thousands of fraudulent ballots is overwhelming. And the evidence of the voting software was bogus is overwhelming. Although I don't know why the Democrats would need both fraudulent ballots and software but the evidence for both is overwhelming so there you go.

The Dems motto is legalize the fraud and it's problem solved.  We were told senile Biden received more votes than any candidate in US history.  More than Reagan, FDR, JFK, Obama, or Clinton.  The most popular president in history.  But when he has a "rally' ten people show up.  Eight are from the press and two are bystanders pausing to see what is going on. 
7
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / WFAA-TV Zapruder Interview 11/22/63
« Last post by Jeff Shaw on Today at 01:13:32 AM »
Like most on here I have been studying and researching the JFKA for decades. Until recently I could not bring myself to accept Zapruder alteration. The biggest obstacle for me was the WFAA interview with Zapruder the afternoon of the assassination. When asked what he saw, at one point Z takes his right hand and indicates a large wound to the right side of his head, almost in the exact location we saw being blown out in the film he took. From his indication, the wound was frontal-temporal, at least that’s my interpretation. Bear in mind this interview was done within an hour or so of the assassination. All of which begs the obvious question- Zapruder’s account, first-hand and fresh in his memory, comports with the Z film, and yet I don’t recall any of the Parkland personnel ever indicating a wound as frontal as these two sources indicate. If the film was altered, again I believe there’s solid evidence it was, how do I/we explain away Z’s account on live

Fellow CTs, help me get this monkey off my back.
8
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 11:32:16 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on May 23, 2024, 06:30:40 PM
As I said, I don't ignore anything. I just don't attribute any weight to his estimates of the length of time between the shots or his thinking that the shots were from an automatic rifle. These estimates ranged from a split-second to no, not a split second, more like two seconds to a very, very brief span of time, duly noting that he considered 10-12 seconds to be a very brief span of time.  I don't attribute weight to these estimates because they are inconsistent and do not fit with the spacing observed by many other witnesses.  I do attribute great weight to his recollection of hearing the first shot a perceptible amount of time BEFORE he felt the IMPACT of the bullet in the back.  I accept that because all statements he made about that are consistent and they fit with what is seen in the zfilm and with other witnesses as to when the second shot occurred.

As far as Connally's impression that it was fire from an automatic rifle, all I can say is that he accepts the Warren Commission report that Oswald fired all the shots with the bolt action 2766 MC so his impression was wrong by his own admission.  Besides, 10-12 seconds to fire and then reload aim and fire two more shots does not require an automatic rifle.
You aren't serious are you?   In every statement he ever made he emphasized that he heard the first shot and THEN after turning around to his right, failing to see JFK properly and deciding to turn left he felt the impact of the bullet in his back. For example 4 H 135-136:
"Mr. SPECTER. In your view, which bullet caused the injury to your chest, Governor Connally?
Governor CONNALLY. The second one.
SPECTER. And what is your reason for that conclusion, sir?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn’t conceivably have
been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot. In the first place, I
don’t know anything about the velocity of this particular bullet, but any rifle
has a velocity that exceeds the speed of sound, and when I heard the sound
of that first shot, that bullet had already reached where I was, or it had reached
that far, and, after I heard that shot, I had the time to turn to my right, and
start to turn to my left before I felt anything.
It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first bullet,
and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously a bullet,..."

What universe are you in Dan?

As I said, I don't ignore anything.

Mason Untruth #6
Do you ignore that on two separate occasions Connally examined the Z-frames and chose z234 as the frame he was hit?
If you don't just ignore it, what is your explanation for this.

What universe are you in Dan?

The universe that understands how the English language works.
9
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Cuba's Investigation into Mexico City: "It Was Oswald"
« Last post by Martin Weidmann on May 23, 2024, 10:21:02 PM »
Quote from: Steve M. Galbraith on May 23, 2024, 07:44:25 PM
It seems obvious that if the person below impersonated Oswald at the Soviet Embassy and Cuban consulate that both Moscow and Havana would have exposed it, would have been telling the world about the act of deception. Screaming it in fact. They wouldn't hold it back. After all they both blamed the CIA for the assassination; why not include this into their allegation?

But like "the dog that didn't bark" was a clue the fact they didn't bark, didn't expose it certainly seems to me evidence - not proof but along with the other information pretty powerful evidence - that it *was* Oswald. Add the fact that both intelligence agencies investigated the incident (Oleg Nechiporenko quotes from the report by the head of the KGB who said it was Oswald) and concluded it was Oswald then what more do we need? We have, then, the Soviet investigation and the above Cuban investigation. Add the American investigation and what more is needed?

What's the other explanation? They were fooled by this person? A four year old can tell you it's not Oswald. And yes I know about the next allegation: "But what the phone calls??!"



The whole "Oswald in Mexico" thing is only significant as a way to color Oswald in the most negative way possible. In no other murder case it would matter where the suspect was weeks prior to the murder. It's only an issue in the Kennedy case and one can only wonder why.

The real question that is never asked is why it is of such importance where Oswald was weeks prior to the assassination when at the same time it's being claimed (by some LN's) that Oswald did not decide to kill Kennedy until 24 to 48 hours before the actual murder.
10
Conspiracy Theories / Re: RFK Jr Believes Second Gunman Involved In Father's Assassination
« Last post by Joe Elliott on May 23, 2024, 08:08:50 PM »
Quote from: Jon Banks on May 13, 2024, 02:50:49 PM
RFK Jr is right.

The evidence of multiple shooters in RFK Sr's murder is overwhelming.

Yes. Just as the Trump supporters say the evidence for thousands of fraudulent ballots is overwhelming. And the evidence of the voting software was bogus is overwhelming. Although I don't know why the Democrats would need both fraudulent ballots and software but the evidence for both is overwhelming so there you go.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10